Washington Insider?

One of my hobbies (read: fascinations) are the Top 10 Most Emailed Articles on the New York Times website. I think they say something about our culture. What we read and like to pass on is a reflection of who we are.

Today, the most emailed article is Paul Krugman's article comparing Clinton's and Obama's health care initiatives (does anyone else have an issue with calling Hillary by her last name?). In fact, the top 5 articles are about the presidential race (the 6th is about the Irish and plastic bags). Not surprising as tomorrow is Super Tuesday. So, today my insight is not so much about the list itself as the actual article.

Big caveat here: I am undecided. I have never been undecided. I used to work in politics. I am a card carrying member of Emily's List, the PAC that supports pro-choice women candidates. I used to work with Hillary's office all the time. But, still, I haven't decided who to support...this may be an entire other blog entry at some point.

It's a good piece. It describes the key differences to the respective candidates' health care plans. Now, I already knew about some of these differences. And, I think they are one of very few policy differences between the two (reason #1 that I'm having issues deciding).

I won't wax on about the policy differences, but what struck me after reading the article is that Obama has decided not to mandate coverage for all.

The interesting piece about this, as Krugman adeptly refers to, is what it says about Obama's negotiation starting point on this topic should he get elected. We all know that national health insurance is unlikely to get passed by the Congress, at least in its full glory. But, isn't the number one rule of bargaining (other than having a BATNA) to ask for it all, fully expecting to only get a portion of it that you'll be happy with at the conclusion? If Obama has already given up mandating that everyone be covered, what will be the next piece to be compromised?

It makes me slightly concerned about his political saavy-ness...his ability to work the Washington machine where your job as a politician is to ask for it all, and then make compromises to get the best result you can.

I'm sure Obama has his reasons. Maybe he decided that he'll get more independents voting for him if he doesn't go all the way...if he stays on the fence, just like they like to.

Anyways, I'll be looking for his response to Krugman's piece tomorrow.